Activities of Emmanuel MAUREL related to 2022/0302(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on liability for defective products
Amendments (24)
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to protect the health and property of consumers, the defectiveness of a product should be determined by reference not to its fitness for use but to the lack of the safety that the public at large isconsumers are entitled to expect. The assessment of defectiveness should involve an objective analysis and not refer to the safety that any particular person is entitled to expect. The safety that the public at largea person is entitled to expect should be assessed by taking into account, inter alia, the intended purpose, the objective characteristics and the properties of the product in question as well as the specific requirements of the group of users for whom the product is intended. Some products, such as life- sustaining medical devices, entail an especially high risk of damage to people and therefore give rise to particularly high safety expectations. In order to take such expectations into account, it should be possible for a court to find a product defective without establishing its actual defectiveness, where it belongs to the same production series as a product already proven to be defective.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) In order to reflect the relevance of product safety and market surveillance legislation for determining the level of safety that the public at large isconsumers are entitled to expect, it should be clarified that safety requirements, including safety-relevant cybersecurity requirements, and interventions by regulatory authorities, such as issuing product recalls, or by economic operators themselves, should also be taken into account in that assessment. Such interventions should, however, not of themselves create a presumption of defectiveness.
Amendment 125 #
(28) Online selling has grown consistently and steadily, creating new business models and new actors in the market such as online platforms. [Regulation […/…] on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act)] and [Regulation […/…] on General Product Safety] regulate, inter alia, the responsibility and accountability of online platforms with regard to illegal content, including products. When online platforms perform the role of manufacturer, importer or distributor in respect of a defective product, they should be liable on the same terms as such economic operators. When online platforms play a mere intermediary role in the sale of products between traders and consumers, they are covered by a conditional liability exemption under the Digital Services Act. However, the Digital Services Act establishes that online platforms that allow consumers to conclude distance contracts with traders are not exempt from liability under consumer protection law where they present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction in question in a way that would lead an average consumer to believe that the product is provided either by the online platform itself or by a trader acting under its authority or control. In keeping with this principle, when online platforms do so present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction, it should be possible to hold them liable, in the same way as distributors under this Directive. That means that they would be liable only when they do so present the product or otherwise enable the specific transaction, and only where the online platform fails to promptly identify a relevant economic operator based in the Uniondefective, dangerous and counterfeit products.
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) Situations may arise in which the acts and omissions of persons other than a potentially liable economic operator contribute, in addition to the defectiveness of the product, to the cause of the damage suffered, such as a third party exploiting a cybersecurity vulnerability of a product. In the interests of consumer protection, where a product is defective, for example due to a vulnerability that makes the product less safe than the public at large isconsumers are entitled to expect, the liability of the economic operator should not be reduced as a result of such acts or omissions. However, it should be possible to reduce or disallow the economic operator’s liability where injured persons themselves have negligently contributed to the cause of the damage.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Member States shall notmay maintain or introduce, in their national law, provisions diverging from those laid down in this Directive, including more, or less,more stringent provisions to achieve a differenthigher level of consumer protection, unless otherwise provided for in this Directive.
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part
(6) ‘damage’ means both material and non-material losses resulting from:
Amendment 234 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c a (new)
(ca) economic loss;
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c b (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point c b (new)
(cb) non-material damages;
Amendment 269 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A product shall be considered defective when it does not provide comply withe safety which the public at large istandards or legislation, match its description or function as consumers are entitled to expect, taking all circumstances into account, including the following:
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) serious adverse effects on consumer health that are indicated in the leaflet without consumers being aware that they will be affected by these serious adverse effects;
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that, where the manufacturer of the defective product is established outside the Union or cannot be identified, the importer of the defective product and the authorised representative of the manufacturer can, the authorised representative of the manufacturer and the online marketplace where the product was sold can be held jointly and severally liable for any damage caused by that product. With regard to online marketplaces, this provision should also apply if the third- party seller is established outside the EU or cannot be identified. The marketplace must be able to identify and provide the means of contacting the manufacturer within a reasonable time, or else it may be held liable for damage caused by that product.
Amendment 313 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Amendment 324 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Article 7 – paragraph 6
Amendment 343 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that national courts are empowered, upon request of an injured person claiming compensation for damage caused by a defective product (‘the claimant’) who has presented facts and evidence sufficient to support the plausibility of the claim for compensation, to order the defendantor intending to do so, to disclose relevant evidence that is at itstheir disposal in a manner that is understandable to consumers.
Amendment 355 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a claimant is not required to prove the damage suffered. The defectiveness of the product, the damage suffered and the and the causal link between the defectiveness and the damage shall be presumed. The onus is on the defendant to prove that there is no causal link between the defectiveness and the damage.
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Amendment 374 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Amendment 375 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Article 9 – paragraph 5
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall ensure that a limitation period of 310 years applies to the initiating of proceedings for claiming compensation for damage falling within the scope of this Directive. The limitation period shall begin to run from the day on which the injured person became aware, or should reasonably have become aware, of all of the following:
Amendment 429 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that the rights conferred upon the injured person pursuant to this Directive are extinguished upon the expiry of a limitation period of 105 years from the date on which the actual defective product which caused the damage was placed on the market, put into service or substantially modified as referred to in Article 7(4), unless a claimant has, in the meantime, initiated proceedings before a national court against an economic operator that can be held liable pursuant to Article 7.
Amendment 434 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. By way of exception from paragraph 2, where an injured person has not been able to initiate proceedings within 105 years due to the latency of a personal injury, the rights conferred upon the injured person pursuant to this Directive shall be extinguished upon the expiry of a limitation period of 1520 years.
Amendment 441 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission mayshall set up and maintain an easily accessible and publicly available database containing the judgments referred to in paragraph 1 and the CJEU judgments delivered in proceedings falling under the scope of this Directive.